The Developmental Origins of Personality Factors from the Self-Definitional and Relatedness Domains: A Review of Theory and Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reviews theory and research on the developmental origins of several widely studied personality vulnerabilities to psychopathology that represent the self-definitional (self-criticism, autonomy, and perfectionism) or relatedness (dependency and sociotropy) domains identified in Blatt's (2008) , Blatt and Shichman's (1983) , and Beck's ( Beck et al., 1983 ) 2-polarities models of personality. We examine the evidence for the effects of both parenting and peer relationships. We conclude that there is a robust relationship between negative parenting behaviors and the 5 personality vulnerabilities reviewed here which pertain to both self-definition and relatedness, with recent evidence suggesting a possible effect of peer relationships over and above parents. The available evidence suggests that all of the negative developmental experiences studied to date contribute to the development of all the personality vulnerabilities reviewed here. In light of this, we suggest possible mechanisms through which adverse developmental experiences may affect personality factors pertaining to self-definition and relatedness. We also suggest that there may be commonalities across the developmental experiences, such that they result in similar developmental consequences. Although there is now much research on the development of these personality factors, there is still relatively little research examining the roles of factors other than parents and peers, including siblings, romantic partners, environmental changes, and genetics, and we conclude by proposing a revised model of the development of self-definition and relatedness in order to outline future directions for this research field.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".